HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5291 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit today, today, taken on record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant-Salman to set aside the order dated 25.04.2025 in IInd Bail Application No. 557 of 25 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 71 of 2025, under Sections 69, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. & Section 3(1)dha, 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Farendra, District Mahrajganj. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State- respondent no.1 and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged on 23.03.2025 in the respect of the incident which had occurred with the victim from the last five years by the appellant. The victim has stated in the FIR that the victim is widow and residing in her maika where in front of her house the appellant resides and he assures her to marry with her and from the last five years he made physical relation with her, on the question of marry, he denied and abused her. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Santosh Kumar Mishra, Vinay Kumar Mishra, Vishwanath Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Salman .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 27.03.2025. Victim is married lady and having three children. The medical examination of the victim has also not been conducted in the present case. The appellant has no criminal history. The victim has not disclosed in the FIR or in the statement recorded under section 180 and 183 BNSS that actually first time alleged offence is said to be taken place. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail had have submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role assigned to the present appellant and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant-Salman involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. CRLA No. 5291 of 2025 2 (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 12, 2025 RPD CRLA No. 5291 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad